for the record, I am not part of the "we need an elite RB crowd".

would it be nice to steal one undrafted? OF COURSE!

but we need a PRODUCTIVE RB, Green is not getting it done.

IMO anyone who is not upset about our running production has gotten too used to the crap we've had for the last 6(?) years, (Grant's 8-game stretch in 07' excluded). or is starting to believe MM's spin doctoring on what a RB is for.

or maybe im just bitter because I hated Green as a draft prospect.

is Jackson a long term answer? no.

is Benson? no.

we will be dafting one anyway and if Brandon Jackson(2nd), Starks(6th), and Green(4th) are any indication, Ted Thompson doesnt have much of an eye for RBs.

why not just use the pick now instead of waiting for the draft?

Edited by member Sunday, October 28, 2012 11:49:36 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Still QB>D

You'll rarely see soley a Defense win a Championship.

I don't understand the whole defense wins championships thing. Cause last time I checked your offense scores the most points not the defense. And if you don't have a QB it's gonna be tough. I still like the odds with a QB.

Those saying D > QB aren't saying that QB isn't important, just that D is more important.

There were a number of statistical analyses done in previous threads looking at past SB winners. The #1 correlator was Def, the #2 correlator was QB. Hence the argument that QB is extremely important but not as important as D.

Agree it is the line not blocking, but not that the lineman are bad at it. More of a scheme issue. When we run from the shotgun, it is either a stretch run, and the defense knows exaclty what they need to do, get to the edge before the oline. Or it is a draw, and the oline is trying to sell pass blocking so they are not pushing as much as holding ground.

The couple times we actually line up in a run formation, and let the Oline come off the ball forward, we have success.

Thanks Macbob.

I was one of the people who did the research and concluded that D is #1 and QB is #2 (and RB is irrelevant).

Gay is new to the site so probably hasn't seen that stuff. Long story short, Gay. I had an argument with RaiderPride awhile back. He said "Defense wins championships" and I said he was full of it. So I did research to prove him wrong and ended up proving him right.

If you look at all the SB winners, they generally are in the top 5 in Defense (counted by Points Allowed, the most important defensive stat). Our 4 SB winners were #1,#3,#1, and #2 respectively. No coincidence. Of course, having an elite QB is the #2 factor. In all four of those games, we had elite QBs - Bart Starr, Bart Starr, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rodgers respectively.

The one SB we lost, our D was #5. We didn't get the sacks we did the year before when we were #1. Which of course brings us to 2010 vs 2011. 2010, we had the #2 D and high 40s in sacks. 2011, we had the #19 D and high 20s in sacks. Our 2011 QB was better than our 2010 QB, but there is no doubt in my mind that the 2010 team would have slaughtered the 2011 team if they met in the Playoffs.

So yes, QB is the most important position. No argument there. But as a unit, D is more important than the QB position when it comes to winning Championships.

Got a degree in History. You have to refute your thesis with fact after fact and if your thesis ends up being factually incorrect, you have to change your thesis.

This degree translated to real life very well. Simply applied it to football.

Packers are still supposedly eyeing Jackson with the trade deadline being pushed to Thursday now...

LINK- ESPN